#fromthevault |
The Equator Art Society is today a subject of some controversy due to whiffs of leftist association. Consequently, many of its ex-members have distanced themselves from their involvement. During its time, several members of the Equator Art Society had sympathy for, and drew inspiration from, the Chinese Communist Party which had at the time recently emerged victorious from its feud with the Nationalists and appeared to be forging a new beginning for postwar China. Since then, the failure of the Cultural Revolution and the experiences of guerrilla warfare in the Malayan Emergency have led to the realist works of that era being tainted with the brush of unsavoury leftism. This, again, harks back to the dangers of ignoring the prevalence of perception in assuming what a “realist” work is.
Realism can, and has taken many different forms. This could be part of its seductiveness and appeal. Art historians have dealt with this by assigning to it different branches; in doing so, breaking down the movement into categories to be identified. “Social Realism.” “Socialist Realism.” “Photo Realism.” “Not Realism.” But just as often as art historians and/ or participants, we forget the intentions and ambitions behind each of these styles. Categories have no meaning until we start thinking of realism as different strategies taken by artists to shape meanings that are contextually-specific.